Yes--what Joe said.
I don't have the facts regarding Obamacare's "response" to Cancer & AIDS to which you are referring, so I can't comment.
But I DO see that you are creating a false argument by saying that they "can't deliver mail". Of course they can. And--as Joe pointed out--they don't have the luxury of eliminating unprofitable routes or customer groups. If we believe that mail delivery is a vital function to which all of our citizens need access, the government is the ONLY entity capable of providing the service. Private enterprise will cherry-pick the lucrative parts and abandon the rest.
This is the phony argument that people use about public transportation--"They can't even run the system in a financially self-sustaining way." Well--duh. It's not generally feasible. But some enlightened communities believe that there is a larger public good that is served by having effective, reliable public transportation. The fact that it requires PUBLIC support is not de facto proof that it is not being run properly or should be eliminated. It benefits EVERYONE--except the inscreasingly insulated plutocracy who don't want to part with any of their precious money to fund it because no-one THEY know has ever ridden a bus. But they are selfish motherf**kers, and that's another topic for another thread.
And so, Goth--that is exactly why government SHOULD be taking on healthcare. If you leave it strictly to private enterprise, the profitable communities will be served and the rest of the country will be left to die in the streets. And some decent people who manage to find it in their hearts to give a damn about someone other than themselves are willing to see some of their tax dollars go to subsidize such an idea.
You think, what do you want?
You think, make a decision...
.jpg?format=auto&width=300)
